Tensions on the oil shipping lanes in the Gulf have escalated with the announcement of new naval exercises by Iran's Revolutionary Guards and news that Israel and the US are planning to carry out extensive joint manoeuvres in the region.

The naval commander for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, said the drill in February would be "different compared to previous exercises held by the IRGC". The Iranian navy finished 10 days of exercises in the Gulf on Monday, during which it tested a range of new missiles. It warned that Iran could close the strait of Hormuz, the narrowest point in the Gulf, through which a fifth of the world's traded oil passes.

On the same day, the Israeli military said it was preparing for joint exercises with the US to rehearse missile defence and co-operation between the forces. The manoeuvres involve thousands of troops, have been planned for some time and were hailed by Israeli and US officials as their biggest joint drill.

Associated Press quoted an unnamed Israel official as saying the drill would test multiple Israeli and US air defence systems against incoming missiles and rockets in the next few weeks. Israel has developed the Arrow anti-ballistic system, which is designed to intercept Iranian missiles in the stratosphere, with the US.

The military activity in the region comes at a time of high tension. At the end of this month, EU foreign ministers are expected to agree to impose an embargo on Iranian oil imports, after a report in November by the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirmed western allegations that Iran had worked on nuclear weapon design.

Iranian officials have made clear they would view an oil embargo as an act of aggression, and could respond by closing the strait. The US and UK have said they would act to keep the shipping lanes open. Philip Hammond, the British defence secretary, said during a visit to Washington: "Disruption to the flow of oil through the strait of Hormuz would threaten regional and global economic growth. Any attempt by Iran to close the strait would be illegal and unsuccessful."

The sabre-rattling over the strait drove the price of crude to more than $100 a barrel. Meanwhile, there is continual speculation that Israel might attack Iran's nuclear programme, which Tehran says is for peaceful purposes, and which the west and Israel allege is a front for acquiring nuclear weapons, or at least a capacity to make them. Observers say all sides are flexing their muscles to deter their adversaries from taking aggressive action, but warn that heightened activity will increase the chances of an unplanned clash.

Mark Fitzpatrick, a former US state department official now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said: "I'm not predicting there is going to be a skirmish, but in the absence of established communications, the tensions and the activity raises the possibility of an unintended exchange of fire."

The USS John Stennis, a US aircraft carrier deployed to the region, is outside the Gulf and an Iranian navy commander has warned Washington not to bring it back. The US navy said it would continue to patrol the Gulf as normal.

Fitzpatrick said he did not think Iran would attack shipping through the strait of Hormuz "as it would be an invitation to the US to take wider action and attack its nuclear sites".

Another flashpoint could come in June, when US sanctions on the trade in Iranian oil come into effect. Gary Sick, an Iran expert and former White House policy adviser now at Columbia University, said such measures were "the equivalent of a military blockade of Iran's oil ports, arguably an act of war".

"The main reason why Iran's putative threat to close the strait of Hormuz was dismissed is because Iran also relies on the strait to export its own oil," Sick wrote in his blog. "But if Iran's oil revenue – 50% of its budget – is cut off, they would have little to lose by striking out at those they hold responsible, including passage through the strait of Hormuz.

"Iran cannot defeat the US navy, but the swarms of cruise missiles they could fire, both from shore and from their fleet of speedboats, could create havoc, as could the flood of mines they could put into the fast-moving waters of the strait."

Fitzpatrick said even under sanctions, Iran would still have "multiple markets for its oil", and would therefore still have a lot to lose by closing the strait.

71 comments:

The most positive affect would be a reality check for the Iranians. Their currency is in shambles and spring is not far away, enough time for the economic sanctions to have serious impact on the Iranian people and major street demonstrations to resume.

The British and French seem to be firmly behind this, at least to the point of a show of force. All in all, this is preferable to a unilateral attack by Israel or the US.

The Iranian regime has no upside to provoking a war. The potential consequences of an arbitrary attack by Israel or the US against Iran could have equally disastrous outcomes.

Let’s hope that this display hastens a diplomatic solution and we do not repeat the calamity of our Iraq adventure.

So it shall begin. Iran will stand tall inshallah. It will become example and pride for Muslims inshallah. The objectives of the triangle of evil, US Israel and Saudi Arabia, or neocons zionism and wahhabism, are known to all Muslims. However, the targetted countries like Iraq, Syria, and Iran have been passive and reactive to such plots, rather than proactive and decisive in handling such critical matters. If the zionist nazis of the west and the son of satan Isra-Hell decide upon war on Iran,then it is a MUST that Iran should bring the war to the cities of the west by hook or crook. This time let the mushrooms of the west taste the horror of war upon there own loved ones,and let them too see there infrastrutre destroyed, there hospitals,water plants,sewage systems, comminications, airports, government, military buildings,commerce and much much more destroyed too. I am sure there many friends of Iran who would willingly help Iran by all means possible. Let the west suffer murder and mayhem too.

Smile though your heart is achingSmile, even though it's breaking When there are clouds, in the sky, you'll get byIf you smile, through your fear and sorrowSmile, and there'll be tomorrowYou'll see the sun come shining throughIf you'll....Light up your face with gladnessHide every trace of sadnessAlthough a tear, may be ever so near,That's the time, you must keep on tryingSmile, what's the use of crying?You'll find that life is still worthwhile, If you'll just....Light up your face with gladnessHide every trace of sadnessAlthough a tear, may be ever so near,That's the time, you must keep on tryingSmile, what's the use of crying?You'll find that life is still worthwhile, If you'll just....Smile

Anonymous said...I swear by allah, I won't smile at all till the mahdi comes, inshallah.

What does the sun, and life, mean to me.

===========================

Today we have politicians in the pocket of AIPAC. Palin had her twin US, Israel flags on her governors desk.

My personal opinion is no US politician should have loyalty to anything but the American people. It is against the US national interest to do Israeli bidding, or it puts US lives and treasure on the line for something that benefits Israel more than America.

AIPAC would get about as far as IranPAC, if there is such a thing, if the American people didn't have its affection for Israel.

The potential consequences of an arbitrary attack by Israel or the US against Iran could have equally disastrous outcomes.

What in goodness name would be arbitrary about it? They have said they want a world without the little and great satan, and strive for the means to try and bring it about. Arbitrary would be if we say attacked Canada.

If, as Trish affirmed, rufus is a wonderful guy just always wrong about everything, he serves a useful purpose nonetheless. If the question at hand only has two possible answers, he is like a guiding star. If the problem may have multiple possible answers, he at least serves an eliminative function.

Just two weeks ago U.S. Defence Secretary Leon Panetta predicted Iran could have nuclear weapons in “probably about a year . . . perhaps a little less”. About the same time, Washington’s Nonproliferation Policy Education Centre published a report that predicted: “If Iran were to now make an all-out effort to acquire nuclear weapons, it could probably do so in two to six months.”

That timeline could be sped up considerably, if Iran has an as-yet undetected clandestine nuclear enrichment facility, the study said.

Canada OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper delivered a scathing rebuke of Iran on Thursday as tensions build in the Middle East, saying the regime in Tehran is the greatest threat to global security and may be looking to use a nuclear weapon.

Harper said Iran’s musings in the last week to close the Strait of Hormuz — one of the busiest oil shipping routes in the world — reinforces how serious a threat the country is to peace and security on the planet.

"As steep as the price for hitting Iran may be, a military strike on Iran will be less painful than the cost of living with an Iranian nuclear weapons threat," argues former Mossad head Maj. Gen. (res.) Danny Yatom. "The backlash from a strike on Iran's nuclear sites will not be as bad for Israel as will an Iran armed with nuclear weapons," he says. "I don't think that those predicting apocalyptic repercussions of a strike on Tehran are correct, and even if they are, Israel can't afford to wonder if Tehran will go crazy and bomb us."

Yatom's position is diametrically opposed to that of former Mossad head Meir Dagan, who sparked significant controversy earlier this year by stating that an attack on Iran would be a foolish move that would lead to a war with an unknown outcome.

It is impossible to stake the nation's security on predictions by those who claim a nuclear Iran can be deterred and that the Iranian regime would not launch a nuclear attack, Yatom added. He acknowledged that rocket attacks would likely ensue from Lebanon and Gaza following a Western or Israeli strike against Iran, but added that Israel's response would be "so painful and crushing that rockets will come to an end. Civilian facilities and infrastructure in Lebanon and Gaza will have to be hit. Innocent civilians could be hurt. But we will have to deliver a crushing blow so that the barrage of rockets against us will not continue."

The world does not have much time left to act on Iran, the former Mossad head warned, adding that "there is an evaluation that they have crossed the red line. They have the knowledge to make the bomb. All that is needed now is the decision to do it.... The world has a year in which to halt the Iranian nuclear weapons program, probably less."

Yatom also doubted that sanctions or covert operations could stop the Iranians. "We have only two options: to let Iran get the bomb, or to use military force against their military nuclear program. I think that force will have to be used. But I don't think Israel should lead. This is, after all, a global problem.... Nevertheless, should the world stand on the sidelines, Israel will be fully entitled to use its natural right to self-defense. To us, the Iranian nuclear weapons program is an existential threat."

The complicated relationship between the Mossad and Israeli mediaThe Mossad's attitude toward journalists: Respect them, suspect them and use them.

Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan's crusade this week against an Israeli strike on Iran took on a new dimension with his several media interviews. His campaign also reflects the Mossad's attitude toward journalists, something along the lines of respect them, suspect them and use them. The degree shifts from one Mossad head to the next.

Some Mossad chiefs considered appointing a spokesman for the organization and then had second thoughts; one ordered that former employees be barred from Mossad headquarters because they gave media interviews without asking his permission.

So maybe Dagan is saying in public one thing and in private saying something else...

Do you really think Dagan is speaking to the PUBLIC the same things he speaks in private...

Dagan is personally responsible for setting the Iranians back for YEARS on their nuke plans...

Everytime DR quips that the prediction for Iran to get the bomb is 2-3 years away since 1997 the reason it keeps getting pushed back is because people like Dagan are actually PUSHING it back...

Israel's official motto: "By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War”. Obama must believe the Americans are morons. America only fights wars for Israel. No other country begs the US for war and genocide. 'Who is going to deny the fact that Israel wants world war 3 starting with Iran.

Zionist Senator Joseph Lieberman, foremost champion of the Iraq War, told Fox News that the “US must pre-emptively act in Yemen. He also wants war with Iran, and called for the Iraq war. Israel called for the Iraq war.

How convenient for the Zionists who love to send American Gentile kids to die for their causes but they ain’t the problem. AIPAC is one thing, but it seems to have nothing to do with garnering the Jewish vote in elections.A belief has been propagated and nurtured in the US that America's and Israel's future are somehow entwined in destiny. That comes mostly from right-wing Christians for reasons I have no idea but the Jews are smart enough to take advantage of them and do.

US Senator Burton Wheeler even argued that if United States soldiers intended to "stamp out banditry, let's send them to Chicago to stamp it out there. ... I wouldn't sacrifice...one American boy for all the damn Nicaraguans.

prop·a·gan·da [prop-uh-gan-duh] Show IPAnoun1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.2. the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.3. the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.

Anonobob:Heh, the aircraft carrier Stennis reentered the gulf after being told not to, by the Iranians, and immediately rescued 17 Iranians held captive on a freighter by Somali pirates.

You should look at a globe, Bob.

Doug:How can one easily dismiss anyone's coming?

That's what all this is about, the Twelfth Imam getting his rocks off?

Logos:A belief has been propagated and nurtured in the US that America's and Israel's future are somehow entwined in destiny. That comes mostly from right-wing Christians for reasons I have no idea but the Jews are smart enough to take advantage of them and do.

Anglo-Israelism. The belief that Britain, America, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are descended from the ten "lost tribes". It was the same impulse that led Virgil to write the Aeneid and posit that Rome was colonized by a hero from the Trojan War.

I didn't think so, but the response was so preposterous that I had to question it.

Actually the idea of British/Israelism is no more/less preposterous than the idea that all life miraculously evolved from nothing into the rich diversity of highly complicated extant and extinct lifeforms.

Magnificent Ronald and the Founding Fathers of al Qaeda

“These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America’s founding fathers.” — Ronald Reagan while introducing the Mujahideen leaders to media on the White house lawns (1985). During Reagan’s 8 years in power, the CIA secretly sent billions of dollars of military aid to the mujahedeen in Afghanistan in a US-supported jihad against the Soviet Union. We repeated the insanity with ISIS against Syria.